--- Day changed Fri Oct 30 2015
00:21 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
00:24 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #secp256k1
00:50 < gmaxwell> man, I'm just adding coverage barely faster than other people are taking it away!
01:02 < gmaxwell> New flags thing uses the illegal arguments callback from within the create function. This isn't so useful, since most of the point of the illegal args callback is that you can runtime replace it with something that doesn't abort(), but obviously something in the create can't do that.
04:54 < jonasschnelli> are there any conceptual NACKs/ACKs for https://github.com/bitcoin/secp256k1/pull/337? Should dbitbox work in a different direction (wNAF)?
04:55 < jonasschnelli> We really would like to ship a firmeware that uses libsecp256k1 in a unmodified way.
05:04 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:01 -!- testing-tape [~testing-t@cpe-172-73-230-228.carolina.res.rr.com] has joined #secp256k1
07:03 -!- testing-tape [~testing-t@cpe-172-73-230-228.carolina.res.rr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:55 -!- [b__b] [~b__b]@ec2-54-85-45-223.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:56 -!- [b__b] [~b__b]@ec2-54-85-45-223.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #secp256k1
13:33 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #secp256k1
13:58 -!- jtimon [~quassel@74.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:17 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-whpembthkxrvhapz] has joined #secp256k1
14:39 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:45 -!- [b__b] [~b__b]@ec2-54-85-45-223.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:46 -!- [b__b] [~b__b]@ec2-54-85-45-223.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #secp256k1
16:48 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #secp256k1
17:07 -!- sipa [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
18:40 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.4-dev]
18:45 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has joined #secp256k1
19:06 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: we are really focused right now on getting a release out; and changes that reduce the validity of verification are not a priority for me at this instant. e.g. I would likely outright NAK a fw-naf change, _for the moment_ at the moment, though I believe thats what we'll do in the long term there.
19:07 -!- mode/#secp256k1 [+o gmaxwell] by ChanServ
19:07 -!- mode/#secp256k1 [-o gmaxwell] by gmaxwell
19:09 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: as far as the specific patch goes, it should probably be changed to only support two sizes, because right now you can do things like set it to 3 but 256/3 isn't an integer and it won't work right.   Like SECP256K1_SIGNING_TABLE_REDUCED
19:10 < gmaxwell> setting it to 8, the next option, is not going to be faster for anyone, almost certantly, due to the cmov overhead.
19:11 -!- sipa [~pw@2a02:348:86:3011::1] has joined #secp256k1
19:12 < gmaxwell> sipa: you missed:
19:12 < gmaxwell> 19:06 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: we are really focused right now on getting a release out; and changes that reduce the validity of  verification are not a priority for me at this instant. e.g. I would likely outright NAK a fw-naf change, _for the  moment_ at the moment, though I believe thats what we'll do in the long term there.
19:12 < gmaxwell> 19:09 < gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: as far as the specific patch goes, it should probably be changed to only support two sizes, because right  now you can do things like set it to 3 but 256/3 isn't an integer and it won't work right.   Like  SECP256K1_SIGNING_TABLE_REDUCED
19:12 < gmaxwell> 19:10 < gmaxwell> setting it to 8, the next option, is not going to be faster for anyone, almost certantly, due to the cmov overhead.
19:14 < gmaxwell> I think beyond that nit, if it were just changed to a binary option, we could take that upstream.  I am not as concerned about the testing for that, because the change is so small. And I'll be happy to give it some testing cycles.  There are some better tests for that in the BIST test pull req thats burried in history someplace.
19:27  * gmaxwell pops a cork
19:27 < gmaxwell>   branches...: 95.1% (888 of 934 branches)
19:27 < gmaxwell> thats master, I'm only 5 days behind where I thought I'd be on that. :-/
20:27 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:52 -!- evoskuil [~evoskuil@c-73-225-134-208.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #secp256k1